Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
San Francisco to Block Most Municipal Mac Purchases Following Apple's EPEAT Withdrawal
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Blindly following standards just because they're standards when there may be better ways to get the same end result is stupid and may well be counterproductive in the end.
Reducing IC engine emissions is a laudable goal; specifying certain ways of attacking the problem (and disallowing anything else) can turn out to be counterproductive.
For example; CA mandated adding MTBE to gasoline to reduce certain types of emissions. Too bad that the MTBE ended up in water sources, with poorly-understood health consequences. Other examples could be brought up.
Better to specify a desired end result, leaving the method(s) for achieving that result open. Something that could actually stimulate innovation.
I hope you're aware that cost and adhering to regulations are two big decision factors for a company. I understand you look up to Apple and like to model your business after them. But there are many models for a successful business. Apple's is just one. And one that works well. For them. It might not work for many companies.
Just because something offers "more" doesn't make it the better choice. I know that sounds backwards. Just like not everyone needs an iPad- some people are just as fine with a Kindle or Kindle Fire.
Like I said earlier - many office situations don't warrant the expense of an Apple computer when you also factor in repair ability and time involved to maintain. Many office workers (and in this case - city workers) would probably still be ok with a dumb terminal. All of the amazing benefits of having an Apple computer are superfluous in this scenario.
I don't understand Apple these days. They seem to be pulling out of a lot of enterprise type solutions. It seems like they have all but given up on the profesional market too. Sure these things may be a smaller slice of the pie then iOS devices, but it's all synergy, which is how Apple got to this point to begin with. They seem to have forgotten that. From my perspective it would be better to try to get your devices into every household AND business no matter what the product is....get those computers in there...sell them some iPads. The more you sell, the better. Instead we seem to have a situation where Apple is saying, no thanks...you can buy something else instead. And I don't understand why you would ever want to throw away business like that.
Thank you for a reasonable analysis here! Also... We don't know what Apple knows. Maybe EPEAT is going to change their standards or dissolve altogether. After reading some of these comments, I am wondering: Since when did EPEAT become a religion?
lolGiven that its very clear that Apple no longer wish to be in the desktop/laptop market I dont see this as a problem for them. All they care about now is iOS and the AppStore. Everything else is secondary.
As far as Apple is concerned, they are only maintaining OS X to allow for development of iOS apps.
Edit Guessing the downvotes are from people who dont want to believe that this is happening. Open your damn eyes...
Is that why they decided to come out with a new OS X every year and just released a sick new MacBook pro with a retina display?
"In Apple we trust!" The problem with your logic is many fold. Relatively few Apple computers will end up recycled by Apple. Regardless of who does the recycling, fused LCD panel/metal case simply can't be recycled. And the glued battery? The first thins one needs to do to recycle it is to extract it from the case. Easy to do with screws. Not so easy to do with glue.
----------
Thank you for a reasonable analysis here! Also... We don't know what Apple knows. Maybe EPEAT is going to change their standards or dissolve altogether. After reading some of these comments, I am wondering: Since when did EPEAT become a religion?
EPEAT "became a religion" after Apple heavily promoted it.
It's not hard to understand.
What's hard to understand that their standard is dated and needs to reflect things like the MBPR, iPad and other products that will be modeled on these new design innovations?
EPEAT is in the wrong here...not Apple. SFO is going to be spending/wasting lot of $$$ on writing a ton of waivers...
So, all of your points are hyperbole and exaggerated personal anecdote.
I have a house full of Macs, but none of them has lasted 7 years without a major hardware failure!
Our macbook lost the keyboard assembly (repaired under warranty), logic board (repaired under warranty), power adapter (cost $100 to fix) and screen (turned yellow, they won't fix it, not worth it to replace) over the course of 3 years.
The 2008 Mac Pro has had 3 Apple-sourced hard drive failures, and after the first one, they wouldn't replace them for free anymore, so I just bought replacement ones 3rd party. Two months ago, I discovered that second DVI port on the graphics card no longer works.
I had to take back 3 aluminum wired keyboards before I got one that typed correctly (random buttons don't respond on the first press). Those I didn't have to pay for because they were able to verify the problem in-store and the keyboards were brand new.
The graphics on my 2011 MPB are messed up (random visual artifacts everywhere since upgrading to 10.7), just out of warranty, and nobody at the Mac Store Genius Bar can explain what is wrong or give me any advice except to replace the logic board at my expense.
In the mean time, I have a little self-built PC with an old Athlon processor in it that I use as a media hub that has been running without any modifications since before you could buy Windows Vista, whenever that was. It streams 720p and 5.1 dts audio to my receiver without any issues at all. it took me a while to get it right from the software side, but once I had things the way I wanted, it was just a device performing a function without any fuss. If I ever spring for a big 1080p display, I might consider replacing that PC, or upgrading it.
So, anecdotally, my Macs are a MUCH bigger source of failure than my PC.
----------
So you think EPEAT should just roll over and play dead with the glued batteries and fused screens that can't be safely recycled? If they approve/waiver products that don't meet the basic concept of "recyclable" then why exist in the first place?
So true. Funny how so many people in the country love to hate on California but have no trouble taking its money. The entire south takes way more than it contributes yet loves to vilify California while sucking on the proverbial government tit. Of course they won't admit that. Instead they'll rattle their tea pots and scream about personal responsibility, a concept they don't understand, much less practice.
Sorry - why does anyone have to be wrong? To get the EPEAT "rating" you adhere to their criteria. Apple doesn't adhere to their criteria. That doesn't make Apple OR EPEAT wrong. It just means they aren't compatible.
Just because Apple is no longer choosing to participate in EPEAT certification, that doesn't make them less environmentally conscious. It just means that they no longer want to be beholden to someone else's standard. Let's see how Apple handles recycling of these new EPEAT-unfriendly products before assuming the worst.
There is a reason why EPEAT does not reflect things like MBPR. It's because MBPR is not recycling friendly. Everybody but Apple fans agree with that.
They would not do it do it all at one time.
Now all those computers would be replaced with in 3 years-4 years during their normal upgrade cycle.
Not necessarily true. Maybe it just requires a little more work. Maybe Apple would rather recycle these new products themselves. Besides, how much e-waste really gets recycled anyway? Does anyone seriously believe that when you drop off a box of tech refuse at your local Best Buy or Office Depot or recycling center that it REALLY gets stripped down and recycled? It ends up in some third world country.
Dropping EPEAT was strategic on Apple's part. Why stay in a program that won’t approve a flagship product?
I love SF, but the city needs to rethink this one. Difficult to recycle is not the same as ‘impossible’ to recycle. The policy should demand recyclability without hamstringing design progress.
Also, while this will seem implausible to those who don’t get it, SF’s employee pool quality will take a small hit by eliminating Apple products. There are those (of us) who literally would refuse a job if denied our tools of choice. The Bay Area hosts a lot of hot minds who insist on Apple, and there’s no glut of skilled people as there is elsewhere.
Backing the EPEAT horse in this race is foolish. CIO’s and policy makers need to adjust to Apple’s lead.
Plus, what do you want to bet that a method and protocol for recycling these bonded components emerges soon enough, probably with Apple involved all the way.
I love SF, but the city needs to rethink this one. Difficult to recycle is not the same as ‘impossible’ to recycle. The policy should demand recyclability without hamstringing design progress.
Also, while this will seem implausible to those who don’t get it, SF’s employee pool quality will take a small hit by eliminating Apple products. There are those (of us) who literally would refuse a job if denied our tools of choice. The Bay Area hosts a lot of hot minds who insist on Apple, and there’s no glut of skilled people as there is elsewhere.
Backing the EPEAT horse in this race is foolish. CIO’s and policy makers need to adjust to Apple’s lead.
Plus, what do you want to bet that a method and protocol for recycling these bonded components emerges soon enough, probably with Apple involved all the way.
You just contradicted yourself. "SF’s employee pool quality will take a small hit by eliminating Apple products. " and "there’s no glut of skilled people as there is elsewhere. "
And I don't think EPEAT cares whether it's a FLAGSHIP product of APPLE at all. That's not their job to concern themselves with.
EPEAT has guidelines. If they are met - they are approved. if not - they aren't. It's as simple as that. They aren't MAKING any company do ANYTHING.
IE - if a car, to be environmentally friendly and earn some "badge" or approval has to get 45 miles per gallon and it gets 44 - it doesn't matter how amazing everything else about the car is for the environment.
Exactly. Pretty ridiculous to assume that there's no way to remove and recycle such components. More difficult does not equal impossible.
So OSX doesn't have days when it doesn't feel like working? I've had as many problems with OSX as I do with Windows. iPhoto freezes up the whole system anytime I go full screen. My MacBook Pro deleted all of a 30 minute video I was trying to put together. My HP Envy has crashed once. Just because your Macs work perfect doesn't mean all Macs do.
I've gone 6 years on a Dell Inspiron 1420. It's quite slow, yes. But it only has 1GB of RAM and a single core Pentium processor running Vista. That's pretty remarkable considering the mess Vista was. I'm really surprised it's running.
There are too many Apple Apologists here. Apple is at fault for not using environmentally friendly materials; stop trying to twist it and make EPEAT the bad guy. I know many of you want to think they are perfect and can never be wrong in their decision-making, but this time they are.
I really miss the days when Apple prided them selves on the fact that they were an Environmentally-Friendly company.
Last edited:
Agreed. I've actually had more spinning beach balls on my mac then I ever had hourglasses on a PC.
I use both PC and Macs. Each have their strength and weaknesses. And the whole "It just works" is a misnomer.
Hippies and Crazy Left Wingers really at the end of the day only give a damn about themselves. WIIFM at its finest.
Not a contradiction. Jobs for skilled workers are going unfilled, even in SF. There's no "glut". So if SF wants to compete for the best people, it pays for them to have the welcome mat out for Apple-philes.
Clearly. EPEAT doesn't currently care, and whether they should care or not is irrelevant. It's SF and other cities that should "care" -- SF should consider adjusting policy and avoid staying religiously locked on EPEAT's tenets.
Boils down to - Total Cost of Ownership
With all the hubbub in this thread it seems as if everyone is missing the point especially when it comes to spending tax dollars. There are many articles on the internet about Total Cost of Ownership of Macs vs PCs, below is a link to a non Apple related site that shows Apple is less expensive to own over it's life than a less expensive initially PC
http://www.cio.com/article/569163/Are_Macs_Really_Cheaper_To_Manage_Than_PCs_
With all the hubbub in this thread it seems as if everyone is missing the point especially when it comes to spending tax dollars. There are many articles on the internet about Total Cost of Ownership of Macs vs PCs, below is a link to a non Apple related site that shows Apple is less expensive to own over it's life than a less expensive initially PC
http://www.cio.com/article/569163/Are_Macs_Really_Cheaper_To_Manage_Than_PCs_
Who said those products can't be recycled? The EPEAT standard is about manufacturing, when it (or some "standard") should be about recycling.
Could you link to another study that wasn't designed by " a group of software developers who've bandied together to deploy and manage Macs in the enterprise."
ETA - also - did you read page two of that study/article? I don't think the article really supports your argument.